标题: OG12-63 [打印本页] 作者: sunnylbs 时间: 2010-12-14 13:16 标题: OG12-63 When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, “No.” Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies. Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above? (A) Why does the part that replies not answer, “Yes”? (B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation? (C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist’s suggestion that they are deaf? (D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described? (E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
答案是A。这道题我死活绕不明白。。。谁能帮我解释一下deaf part和reply part到底是个什么意思啊。。。deaf part是指听不见？reply part是指不能对听见的对话做出反应？我当时选的是C，即既然聋了，就应该听不见，于是就不能做出反应，所以“Why appear to accept?" 谁能帮我理一下思路？感激不尽！！！！作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2010-12-14 22:52
Since the deaf part and the replying part are dissociated from each other, we can deduce the part that replies is not deaf. Thus, when answering the question "Can you hear me?", they should reply "Yes!"作者: ananyolanda 时间: 2010-12-16 05:23
我还是不明白为什么D就不可以？看了以前的帖子，大多都是解释A为什么可以。 因为催眠者没有dissociated two seperate parts，所以被催眠者回答的都是同一个答案，由此证明别人的argue是错误的，不是也对吗？作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2010-12-16 05:50
If the hearing part and the deaft part are separated, all subjects can give a uniformed answer to the same question. This is in accordance to the theorist hypothesis. For example, if they all answer "Yes," the hypothesis holds. So the fact that the answers are uniformed does not weaken the argument.作者: ananyolanda 时间: 2010-12-16 06:13
哦~~~谢谢~~作者: huangyouhuifei 时间: 2011-2-7 22:41
试回答： 翻译： 背景：当被催眠者被告知自己聋了时，催眠师问他们是否能听见，他们回答“不能”。有些专家认为这是因为他们的自我被分为了两部分，聋的自我和回答的自我被分离了。
7楼的解释很给力，终于让我明白了~